This is an excerpt from A Christian Peace Experiment: The Bruderhof Community in Britain, 1933–1942.

Historian Ian Randall’s book explores the establishment of the Bruderhof, an pacifist Christian communal movement, in England in the context of a wider peace movement that had arisen in response to the devastation of World War I. Thousands of Britons had pledged never to participate in war again, but now the threat of world war loomed and the government began conscription. The Bruderhof had begun publishing this magazine, Plough, in English the year before.

As war grew closer in 1939, the issue of military conscription was introduced in the Summer 1939 Plough in relation to the Military Training Act of May 1939 under which all British men aged twenty and twenty-one who were fit and able were required to take six months’ military training. The Plough comment was that it was well known “that under no circumstances will any member of our communities join the fighting forces or do any alternative form of service.” This had been confirmed at a Bruderhof meeting. In fact all the English Bruderhof members were over twenty-one, but it was noted that “some of the closer friends of the Bruderhof communities have refused to be conscripted, and have been put on the register of conscientious objectors.”

This was the first time in Britain that conscription had been introduced in peace-time, and further developments were awaited. The annual Baptist Assembly in May 1939 gave serious consideration to the Military Training Act and passed a resolution on religious freedom which called on the churches to stand by men who were honestly convinced that in loyalty to Christ they should take no part in war. There was also a call to the government to fulfil the spirit as well as the letter of its pledge to treat conscientious objectors (COs) fairly. Peace News reported in July 1939 that the Bruderhof was willing to take in any young men who shared its peace convictions.

At a Bruderhof meeting at the end of July, the outbreak of war was placed in a wider social context and was linked to the challenges for Christian witness. Hardy Arnold recognized that “many people live in fear and anxiety that soon a war will break out.” He also spoke of fears that in such a situation “the oppression of the working class” would increase. There could be a spread of “lying, unfaithfulness, depravity, and impurity,” but in the face of all this it was necessary to advocate “the faith that Christ is victorious.”

By contrast with the belligerent outlook which had characterised much of mainstream British Christianity when the First World War began, the predominant mood at the beginning of the Second World War was one of restraint. The historian Adrian Hastings suggests: “For the Church, as for the nation as a whole, war was seen by September 1939 as inevitable and just, but it was entered into soberly and rather sadly.” It is not the case, however, that everyone in the churches subscribed to the “just war” theory. Ann Kramer speaks of the “flourishing peace movement,” which led in the period of the Second World War to approximately 62,000 conscientious objectors appearing before local tribunals to appeal for exemption from fighting. From 1939 to 1940, membership of the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) in Britain grew from just over 9,000 to almost 12,000, and at the end of 1940 FOR had contact with 1,429 COs, of whom 528 had appeared before tribunals. Ninety-two had been granted unconditional exemption from all service connected with war, which was what the Bruderhof members sought. The Baptist Pacifist Fellowship (BPF) was also growing rapidly in this period, reaching 1,600 members by 1940. In the later 1930s annual Baptist Assemblies adopted anti-war resolutions and the BPF, at its meeting on February, 13, 1939, affirmed that “to be part of the military machine was contrary to our Christian conscience.” After the war began, the BPF approached FOR asking for closer union between the two bodies. Within denominations such as the Baptists, a specifically denominational fellowship could, as the FOR minutes recorded, help to bring churches “to the conviction that the Christian way is the pacifist way.”

A typical Baptist CO, Harold Stead, appealing to the tribunal in May 1940, aged twenty-six, spoke of being guided by the teaching and life of Christ: “He has primary claim to my allegiance.” Stead referred to the Sermon on the Mount and stated that Christ’s Kingdom was “to be built upon the basis of sacrificial love.” He continued: “As one of many co-workers with Him in this Kingdom today, I can use no other force than the all-prevailing force of love.” In Christ, he said, “there is no barrier of race, class or creed” and to participate in war “inevitably separates me from those with whom Christ would have me live in brotherhood.” Stead was a Baptist local preacher and a member of the BPF. His appeal was accepted.

In an interview with the Gloucester Echo, published on September 13, 1939, after the outbreak of war, Hardy Arnold said that fighting was incompatible with Bruderhof beliefs, but he stressed the contribution of the community's farm work, and linked this with the statement that had been made by the Minister of Agriculture about the importance of agriculture in war-time. The Spring 1940 issue of Plough reported that five Bruderhof members had at that stage been called up and had registered as COs. One, Philip Britts, had already appeared before a tribunal and had been granted unconditional exemption. Bruce Sumner, Reginald Lacy, Walter Bennett and Alan Stevenson were scheduled to appear in the near future. The Bruderhof went to considerable lengths to establish a connection with Judge Wethered, who heard tribunal cases in Bristol. Ernest Wethered had a long and distinguished career as a barrister, county judge, public servant and educationalist. He became one of the experts in hearing the cases of COs. By March 1942 he had heard over 4,000, and he wrote an unpublished analysis of the beliefs of the COs whose cases had come to him. At first Arnold Mason and Stanley Fletcher, who attended Bristol tribunal hearings, felt that Judge Wethered was approaching his task without much understanding of COs. Stanley was given the task by the community of protesting to the Judge about his initial treatment of cases, including those submitted from the Bruderhof, and also of explaining Anabaptist convictions. The judge studied Bruderhof literature and saw how the community was dedicated to peace and brotherliness and how members worked without wages. Other tribunals seem to have taken very different approaches. Leyton Richards considered that the Birmingham Tribunal had a pre-determined policy to refuse unconditional exemption.

An example of the statements made by Bruderhof members is the case put forward by Sydney Hindley, on July 2, 1940. The Christocentric approach was similar to that of Harold Stead: “I am convinced that the true way of life was shown by Jesus, and desire with my whole heart to follow him. I respect the State and will obey it in all things which are not contrary to the call of Jesus. He calls me to show my love to God not merely by loving my friends, but by loving my enemies also. He himself clearly revealed that love in his own life and teachings, and above all in his death. I cannot reconcile such love with the killing of my fellows, and therefore I cannot bear arms.” He then went on to speak of wanting to give his life to “a creative, brotherly way of active service.” He explained that he “joined the Society of Brothers nearly four years ago, and am now a full member.” He was granted unconditional exemption from military service.

Also in July, Fred Goodwin applied for exemption using a number of the same themes. As recorded in the Evening Advertiser, he stated: “As a Christian I refuse to do any kind of military service. I have had this conviction for about six years and this contributed to, rather, led me to join the Bruderhof community.” He expressed gratitude for the freedom granted to the Bruderhof in England, and continued: “As a member of the community it is my wish to obey the laws and to fulfil the wishes of the state so far as they do not contradict the obedience which I owe to God.” He believed that the best help he could give to others consisted in “taking my part in the witness of the community which is founded on the New Testament and the witness of the Early Christians.” He was also given complete exemption. Of the approximately 62,000 COs who appeared before local tribunals, only 2,900 were granted unconditional exemption. The consideration afforded to the Bruderhof, with all community applicants ultimately receiving unconditional exemption, was unusual.